Can anyone suggest why girls at 6 change their view of girls' ability to be brilliant?

[Italiangreyhound]

Can anyone suggest why girls at 6 change their view of girls' ability to be brilliant?

Just that?

What's the cause?

www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jan/26/girls-believe-brilliance-is-a-male-trait-research-into-gender-stereotypes-shows

Also, it's role model

Lass no prior to 5 they mostly see their mums. By 5 and 6 they are seeing more of the world.

I think the beauty thing is much wider than affecting them as kids of 6.

I think the beauty thing affects physical abilities. it's harder to run in strappy sandles, harder to climb in a skirt etc.

I don't think the magazine thing is specific to age 6. It is general. And includes them buying their own magazines too.

Do car magazines have women on the front? Gardening?

Oh, goddess, someone told Lass it was harder to climb in a skirt...

Also, it's role model

Oh Helen I was so tempted to say that.

I think the beauty thing affects physical abilities. it's harder to harder to climb in a skirt etc

I am so bored of the "climbing tree" holy grail on MN. And no it is not hard to climb a tree wearing a skirt. Nor is it hard to climb a climbing frame in a play ground.

Which of these do you think spends all their time shopping for clothes and talking about babies?! As opposed to getting on with their jobs or household chores?

Observing that its more often their mum rather than dad doing the dull chores seems to me to be even more corrosive of perceptions of 'brilliance' than concerns about appearance.

Do car magazines have women on the front? Gardening?

No.

They have cars and plants on them.

Google "car magazines" of the dozen or so first examples only 1 had any human being- and it had a man and a women.


Gardening magazines have gardens and flowers. A few had inset pictures of people- there were more women than men.

What is your point? Of course a specialist magazine is going to have pictures of its specialist subject on the cover.

Errol

Possibly, but my argument was specifically about the women referred to by PP who were apparently displaying only shopping, make up and babytalk behaviours to six year old girls.

Any men seen by those six year old girls would also likely be teachers, doctors, parents or parents of friends, and getting on with their jobs/chores in the context of a six year old observing them.

I mean, DH and I both work, but the DCs only see us at home, doing chores, chivvying homework etc.

I've never met anyone like that PP describes either.
But I suspect that in many households, children do see women overwhelmingly doing the mind-numbingly tedious chores (afaik this is still statistically true). Even if both parents are doing equally 'brilliant' jobs (though again, mothers are still more likely than fathers downshift to some extent), that won't necessarily be what the kids see.

True.

But why would that lead to a perception change at 6? There is more time spent in the home pre-school, or with a childcarer who is mostly likely to be female.

Hi all, just read the thread. I'm another one who would strongly recommend Delusions of Gender by Cordelia Fine, a fascinating book and super well researched. I'm not a scientist though so I do think my ability to evaluate scientific studies is a bit limited but DH is a scientist so I use him sometimes to check the reliability of studies if I'm unsure haha. But one thing I've remembered that I'm pretty sure I read in that book, going back to PP who said what would happen if there was a "neutral" toy option for the monkeys (or children) in toy preference studies. Actually I can't remember if it was in that book or in a documentary I once watched. But anyway there was a very famous study (I'm really sorry I know this isn't worth much as I can't remember who did it or anytihng like that so I guess you will all have to take with a pinch of salt) I think in America where a fella set up a toy preference experiment and showed that little boys always picked trucks or something "masculine" and little girls always picked dolls or something feminine. The problem was that initially the first time he ran his study he actually included some kind of toy building game as the "masculine" option but he had to re-run his study to reach the objective he wanted (lol) because when the building game was the "masculine" toy what actually happened was that the vast majority of both boys and girls picked that toy. And I agree that is more significant than a car/truck toys as saying boys are innately more interested in cars is a really weird proposition considering they are such a recent invention. But it seems boys and girls are jointly both equally interested in building things.

to re-run his study to reach the objective he wanted (lol)

Blimey. Even worse than the issue of studies which show no differences being underreported (firstly, not written up, secondly maybe less likely to be deemed worthy of joirnal publication although that shouldn't be the case, thirdly almost never reported in the media).

Yy.

It's also possible in some set ups for researchers to give some body language hints, if they are aware of the sex of the children.

Nor is it hard to climb a climbing frame in a play ground

But it is easy for boys to cluster underneath and try to see girls' knickers. That kept a lot of girls on the ground in my day.

HelenDenver "Oh, goddess, someone told Lass it was harder to climb in a skirt...

"

Please let me in on the joke!!

Whenever that happens, Italian, Lass will challenge it. As indeed, she did a post or two after mine!

"I am so bored of the "climbing tree" holy grail on MN. And no it is not hard to climb a tree wearing a skirt. Nor is it hard to climb a climbing frame in a play ground."

You may be bored but it is a reality. Girls are told not to show boys their knickers, and maybe feel naturally that they do not wish to do so. So to hang from any kind of frame or tree in a skirt is harder!

Lass What is your point?

That the images of women represented in the media are of women looking beatitful but not doing much!

Men on the other hand drive cars and fix things. Brilliant!

Gardening is, I guess, not much to do with this so sorry for bringing that in! Gardening is quite a mixed world, my only experience of it being having a garden and listening to gardeners' question time!

I think the magazines are a red herring actually, in terms of age 6 change, they are more a wider part of media children experience.

The only thing I am aware of at 6, is school. And the change from more play in Foundation/Reception to 'work' in Year 1 and 2 onwards.

"Lass will challenge it." Will you Lass?

At least this thread is mostly good-natured. I am overweight and so tired of bun fights!

Mmm, buns. With lemon icing, preferably...

As the archetypal climbing tomboy as a kid I was always in trousers. However, in my young days many decades ago Girl Guides always wore a serge-type skirt. I had my salutary lesson about climbing in skirts then, when I scaled some very high pointed metal railings (to get into a park, which was closed at sunset ) hooked my skirt on the point bit and was left dangling upside down and, yes, flashing my blue school knickers.

Luckily no one was about, but also unluckily no one as about. So shouting for help was useless. The only way to free myself was to rip my skirt from waist to hem and plunge into the flower bed. Then I had to make my way home.. not a good look.
God bless trousers.

That sounds like scene from Miranda Whoputthecat

whoputthecatout

I can just see it!

I think the magazines are a red herring actually, in terms of age 6 change, they are more a wider part of media children experience

You introduced the subject.